As part of our transition to a new membership platform, all active members must ensure that the email address associated with their Online Institute account matches the email address on their membership account. Matching email addresses are required to automatically receive member discounted pricing on eligible courses and events.
If you need to update your account information or have any questions, please contact us at information@iaedpfoundation.com or continuingeducation@iaedpfoundation.com
While not officially recognized as a clinical diagnosis, ultra-processed food use disorder (UPFUD) is an increasingly observed phenomenon, particularly among individuals with loss-of-control eating and binge-pattern disorders. Rather than debating its legitimacy, this panel explores whether the UPFUD framework can be clinically valuable for tailoring treatment for specific eating disorder (ED) patients, namely those with predominantly out of control eating phenotypes who screen positive for UPFUD. Drawing on diverse disciplines-nutrition, therapy, and medicine-we present three clinical vignettes of patients with ED who explored abstinence-based and/or harm reduction approaches to ultra-processed food use disorder, with varying outcomes. Some found harm-reduction approaches stabilizing for both their ED and UPFUD; others experienced ongoing symptoms and benefited from an individualized, abstinence-based approach.
We highlight the challenges faced by clinicians navigating the polarized landscape of abstinence vs. harm reduction. We advocate for a flexible clinical approach informed by patient preferences, cultural context, neurobiology, and lived experience. Research on addiction-like eating severity reveals impaired cortico-striatal connectivity, suggesting that brain-based individual differences may support tailored interventions. We also review the emerging evidence base, including data from a residential ED center, the FACT manual (harm reduction), and the TRACE intervention-an abstinence-informed, dietitian-led, weight-neutral protocol-which showed no harm to ED pathology and improved some disordered eating behaviors.
Through case studies and a moderated Q&A, we will examine when the UPFUD lens is beneficial or detrimental and how clinicians can utilize it effectively and safely. Ultimately, we argue for a nuanced, flexible, and collaborative model that bridges the gaps between ED treatment, metabolic health, and addiction science. Attendees will leave with tools to critically assess when to introduce-or challenge-the UPFUD framework, how to navigate patient resistance or fear, and how to ensure that interventions do not unintentionally exacerbate disordered eating or shame. Although more research is needed, clinicians can begin applying this lens with care, curiosity, humility and compassion.
